Apart from the performance-art mode to which Sabina refers, others have
suggested thinking about magic as comparable to other art forms. I
think in particular of several illuminating discussions in
Levi-Strauss's work, especially on music.
Those interested in the performance thing might want (apart from reading
Schechner, both Turners, etc.) to take a look at Ron Grimes's _Reader in
Ritual Studies_, which covers a lot of ground. Catherine Bell's
critique of Grimes, in _Ritual Theory, Ritual Practice_, is devastating,
but not necessarily generalizable to the whole approach.
Chris Lehrich
Sabina Magliocco wrote:
>I think one of the reasons anthropological theories of magic have failed to grapple with its nature to anyone's satisfaction is that they inevitably regard magic as faulty technology. In trying to avoid the problematic categorization of "magic" that Grant elucidates so well later on in his post, I have in my own work ventured a different approach: I treat magic (and ritual) as an art form, the same way I would treat dance, music or craft, from a folkloristic point of view. Art, too, involves technology, but its efficaciousness is evaluated differently from that of a scientific technology. It works mostly on human emotions, although it can certainly bring about social and cultural change; it affects reality.
>
>
--
Christopher I. Lehrich
Boston University
|